74% Console and PC Players Looking To Buy A VR Product

SEANMCAD

http://gamingbolt.com/74-console-and-pc-players-looking-to-buy-a-vr-product-according-to-study

maybe some statisticians can explain why in this context 300 respondents would be considered a good sample. That seems small to me but never the less, there is the story

Octagon7711

It's the best they could come up with.  Maybe the 1000 people they interviewed didn't turn out so well so they narrowed the field down to 300 and called it a success.  It would be interesting to read the details of the study.

Tamanous

I'm looking to buy a flying car but won't for a long time because of current cost and viability.

What matters is what people actually buy.

SEANMCAD

Octagon7711 said:

It's the best they could come up with.  Maybe the 1000 people they interviewed didn't turn out so well so they narrowed the field down to 300 and called it a success.  It would be interesting to read the details of the study.

it seems low however having taken a statics class in college that I found interesting one thing I have learned for sure (among other things) is its best to not make assumptions without knowing the mathematical part of it as it relates specifically to statics which is why I hope we have a statistician that can address it.

SEANMCAD

Tamanous said:

I'm looking to buy a flying car but won't for a long time because of current cost and viability.

What matters is what people actually buy.

yes! and 'want to buy a porche' as part of a survey question and 'plan to buy a porche' on a survey question are not the same quesiton

Keller

I'm part of the 26%.


Not saying VR is not going to happen, but it has to be more then a gimmick. The Wii was a nice console, but it couldn't support games like Fallout or GTA. VR will be like the Wii, fun games, but not ready yet for the full experience games.

CrazKanuk

Yeah, that would be troubling considering that an article on IGN indicated that only 37% of gamers were aware of VR. 

That being said, it wouldn't be the first time a gamer said they were "Totally getting...<something>" without knowing what the other person was talking about. *toot toot* thanks hype train

Octagon7711

I plan on buying a VR unit one day but it maybe years before I actually do.  Perhaps they left it open ended instead of asking if they plan on buying one this year for example.

Ramajama

Statistics

SEANMCAD

CrazKanuk said:

Yeah, that would be troubling considering that an article on IGN indicated that only 37% of gamers were aware of VR. 

That being said, it wouldn't be the first time a gamer said they were "Totally getting...<something>" without knowing what the other person was talking about. *toot toot* thanks hype train

an article like that would absolutely be on IGN...lol

anyway, yes I think the sample set on some of the articles are rather low

Alverant

SEANMCAD said:

http://gamingbolt.com/74-console-and-pc-players-looking-to-buy-a-vr-product-according-to-study

maybe some statisticians can explain why in this context 300 respondents would be considered a good sample. That seems small to me but never the less, there is the story

I was "planning" to turn the second bedroom of my condo into an office to write and be creative. It took 10 years for that to happen. People "plan" to buy a lot of things, it doesn't mean a whole lot when they're expensive.

The article also says 60% hope to get them as gifts meaning they don't really plan on getting it, they just want one without having to pay the money.

SEANMCAD

Octagon7711 said:

I plan on buying a VR unit one day but it maybe years before I actually do.  Perhaps they left it open ended instead of asking if they plan on buying one this year for example.

there is fundamentally a difference between these questions and one can reasonably expect different results from the questions when asking 300 people.

'I plan to buy a VR headset'
'I plan to buy a VR headset in 12 months'
'I want a VR headset'

SEANMCAD

Alverant said:

SEANMCAD said:

http://gamingbolt.com/74-console-and-pc-players-looking-to-buy-a-vr-product-according-to-study

maybe some statisticians can explain why in this context 300 respondents would be considered a good sample. That seems small to me but never the less, there is the story

I was "planning" to turn the second bedroom of my condo into an office to write and be creative. It took 10 years for that to happen. People "plan" to buy a lot of things, it doesn't mean a whole lot when they're expensive.

The article also says 60% hope to get them as gifts meaning they don't really plan on getting it, they just want one without having to pay the money.

I knew someone would have to say something like this.

if you ask

'do you plan to buy a VR headset'
'do you want a VR headset

1. those questions will get different results.
2. the likelyhood that there will be more headsets actually purchased with the first question compared to the second question is higher.

'plan to buy' clearly doesnt mean 100% coverage of your example. it DOES however suggest a higher coverage of actual purchases then the question 'want one'

syriinx

74% likely to purchase for themselves
60% likely to request as a gift
56% likely to purchase for someone else

If 3/4 of people are likely to purchase for themselves, why will 3/5 ask for it as a gift?

And what kind of demographic are they looking at when 56% of people will give a several hundred dollar gift like this?  That alone makes it completely obvious this is not a representative sample of 'gamers'.

Rusque

Nice "study" - let's see how it relates in practice.

74% of Console and PC gamers are looking to buy VR.


If this is in any way representative of the non-mobile gaming population as a whole, then 74% +/- the margin of error (let's go with something really conservative like 10%) so 64% of the non-mobile gaming population on the low end, then we should see activity and discussion on these boards showing a pretty sizable majority speaking favorably or generally discussing their desire for VR.

*looks around* . . . seems like it's just one guy who runs around "defending/supporting" VR. A far cry from 64%+

Basically, if this "study" were in any way accurate and representative of gamers, then you wouldn't have to post this thread (or any other pro-VR thread) because a huge number of people on these forums would be all over it like they are all over other pertinent news. But they're not, because VR currently sucks balls, and looks like it will continue to suck said balls in the future.

What's the sound of one hand clapping? VR supporters who aren't paid bloggers. There just isn't a movement for VR right now. Yes, lots of companies are spending oodles of money on it. Yes, there's lot of press about it (an inordinate amount really considering how it's being received by actual people). But each time it gets mentioned, we see that very few (mostly just one person) are actually thinking about hopping on the VR train.

The only thing currently immersed in virtual reality is the VR industry's sense of popularity.

SEANMCAD

I think its funny how everyone is disecting this study in ways to pew pew it but overlooking the most obvious of pew pew problem.

ONLY 300 PEOPLE IN THE POPULATION STATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GladDog

300 is far too small of a sampling of PC and console gamers.  In the US alone, there are over 50 million game players (according to another survey I saw). 300 is a sampling of .006% of those 50 mill.  No statistician in his right mind is going to call that small percentage a proper test group.

Because the test questions revolved around VR, it is very, very likely that most responders are aware of VR, which skews the test group.  most people that are not aware of VR will go into a daze when they see the term and go to another page.

That said, I would really like to see a proper survey on this subject.  I am anticipating VR quite a bit, and I would like to see what the true numbers are on this.  The larger the interested group the more likely we will see great game titles and advancements in the tech.

I am already budgeting to get a PS4Neo and PSVR sometime in November, which should be about when stock is readily available.

SEANMCAD

GladDog said:

300 is far too small of a sampling of PC and console gamers.  In the US alone, there are over 50 million game players (according to another survey I saw). 300 is a sampling of .006% of those 50 mill.  No statistician in his right mind is going to call that small percentage a proper test group.

Because the test questions revolved around VR, it is very, very likely that most responders are aware of VR, which skews the test group.  most people that are not aware of VR will go into a daze when they see the term and go to another page.

That said, I would really like to see a proper survey on this subject.  I am anticipating VR quite a bit, and I would like to see what the true numbers are on this.  The larger the interested group the more likely we will see great game titles and advancements in the tech.

I am already budgeting to get a PS4Neo and PSVR sometime in November, which should be about when stock is readily available.

I agree.

I will say however there is a correction to what you said but it doesnt divert your core point.
'Because the test questions revolved around VR'. One does not become aware of VR because VR questions are being asked. HOWEVER, given they targeted people who play games regularly the chance is high because i would think gamers know what VR is

Octagon7711

Gamespot have those poles up all the time.  They ask your platform how many hours you play a week and then questions about the main interest of the pole.   So these are people who came across the pole while browsing the forums.

simsalabim77

SEANMCAD said:

http://gamingbolt.com/74-console-and-pc-players-looking-to-buy-a-vr-product-according-to-study

maybe some statisticians can explain why in this context 300 respondents would be considered a good sample. That seems small to me but never the less, there is the story

It's not a good sample size. It is good clickbait though. 

psiic

Forbes has actually gone a little bearish on VR, they were very bullish predicting a $20 billion industry, now they are singing doom and gloom for PS4 VR. 

syriinx

SEANMCAD said:

I think its funny how everyone is disecting this study in ways to pew pew it but overlooking the most obvious of pew pew problem.

ONLY 300 PEOPLE IN THE POPULATION STATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If it were a representative sample, than 300 people at 74% would be enough to at least disprove something like 'less than 50% of gamers are interested in VR'.  It would be a VERY positive thing for the future of VR.

But there is no chance that it is a representative sample.

kosac

why? i use edtracker.. VR is to much for 8+ hours gaming..  

SEANMCAD

psiic said:

Forbes has actually gone a little bearish on VR, they were very bullish predicting a $20 billion industry, now they are singing doom and gloom for PS4 VR. 

The financial market needs to calm the F down and stop listening to John Carmack who often cites optimism well off the charts.

There is a quote about change 'its impact is usually large then people think but it takes longer then people think'

SEANMCAD

kosac said:

why? i use edtracker.. VR is to much for 8+ hours gaming..  

I played Elite Dangerous for 8 hours on sunday with VR. really not a problem. To be fair it can be frustrating at time drinking coffee and one cant really not pay 100% attention to the game but other than that really no biggy

syriinx

For large populations such as this, a reasonable approximation for a 95% confidence interval is 1/sqrt(N).

For 300 people, if the sample was truly representative than there would be a 95% chance that the true portion would be 74% +/- 5.8%